Disposed¶71

T Lakshmi Devi v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC2 Sept 2025WP/7881/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh High Court (Amaravati), W.P. No. 7881 of 2022, disposed 03.09.2025 by Kiranmayee Mandava, J. Competing claims to pension and death benefits of a deceased government employee between his claimed second wife (petitioner) and estranged first wife (respondent no. 6). Court declined to determine marital status; directed that benefits may be released to persons named as family members in the deceased's Service Register; petitioner left free to pursue alternate remedies. Keywords: pension and death benefits, Service Register, legally wedded wife dispute, writ of mandamus, alternate remedy, Article 226.

What did the court decide?

The Court declined to adjudicate the question of who is the legally wedded wife of the deceased. ¶70

T Lakshmi Devi Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

APHC010142692022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

WEDNESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBERlo TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 7881 OF 2022

¶9

Between:

¶10

T Lakshmi Devi, aged 43 yrs W/o Late T.Valli Rao R/o^{D.No. 18/88-82,} Mahabuba Nagar Guntakal, Anantapuram District- 515801

¶11

...Petitioner

¶12

AND

¶13

The State of Andhra Pradesh,. Department of Irrigation and CAD Secretariat Complex, Velagapudi Amaravathi rep by its Principal Secretary

¶14

The Commissioner, Department of Irrigation and CAD Gollapudi, Vijayawada

¶15

The District Collector, Anantapuramu District

¶16

The Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department, D.C.Division H.L.C.Colony, Anantapuramu

¶17

The Tahsildar, GuntakalMandal Anantapuramu District

¶18

T Devi Bai, r/o Pakkirappa Colony Near Satyanarayana^Pet,Guntakal Anantapuramu District-515801

¶19

...Respondents

¶20

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd

¶21

respondent in releasing the pension and death benefits of my husband T.Valli Rao, Superintendent, Irrigation Department, Anantapuramu in favour of the 6th respondent as illegal and arbitrary besides violative of petitioner's rights guaranteed under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to release the pension and death benefits in favour of the petitioner who is the legal wedded wife of the said Valli Rao.

¶22

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶23

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to release pension and death benefits or any other benefits of my husband T.Valli Rao, Superintendent, Irrigation Department, Anantapuramu in favour of the 6th respondent pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI HARISH KUMAR RASINENI

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR REVENUE

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 5; GP FOR IRRIGATION Counsel for the Respondent No.6: SRI K V RAGHU VEER

¶27

The Court made the following order:

¶28

¶29

APHC010142692022

¶30

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶31

[3458]

¶32

WEDNESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶33

PRESENT

¶34

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶35

WRIT PETITION NO: 7881/2022

¶36

Between:

¶37

1.T LAKSHMI DEVI, AGED 43 YRS W/0 LATE T.VALLI RAO R/O D.N0.18/88-82, MAHABUBA NAGAR GUNTAKAL, ANANTAPURAM DISTRICT-515801

¶38

...PETITIONER

¶39

AND

¶40

1 .THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, DEPARTMENT OF IRRIGATION AND CAD SECRETARIAT COMPLEX, VELAGAPUDI AMARAVATHI REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

¶41

2.THE COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF IRRIGATION AND CAD GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA

¶42

3.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT

¶43

4.THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT D.C.DIVISION H.L.C.COLONY, ANANTAPURAMU

¶44

5.THETAHSILDAR, GUNTAKALMANDAL ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT

¶45

6.T DEVI BAI, R/O PAKKIRAPPA COLONY NEAR SATYANARAYANA PET, GUNTAKAL ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT-515801

¶46

...RESPONDENT(S);

¶47

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toto issue a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in releasing the pension and death benefits^of my husband^T.Valli

¶48

¶49

Department, Anantapuramu in favour of the 6th respondent as illegal and arbitrary besides violative of petitioner's rights guaranteed under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to release the pension and death benefits in favour of the petitioner who is the legal wedded wife of the said Valli Rao and pass

¶50

\A NO: 1 OF 2097

¶51

or any other Superintendent, irrigation Department, Anantapuramu in favour of the 6th respondent pending disposal of the writ petition and to pass

¶52

lA NO: 1 OF 2Q2fi

¶53

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶54

1.HARISH KUMAR RASINENI

¶55

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶56

1.K VRAGHU VEER

¶57

2.GP FOR SERVICES III

¶58

3.GP FOR SERVICES I

¶59

The Court made the following:

¶60

ORDER

¶61

nd Being aggrieved by the action of the 2 respondent in releasing pension and death benefits of the petitioner's husband late Sri Valli Rao in favour of the 6*^ respondent, the instant Writ Petition is filed.

¶62

¶63

ft 2. The petitioner claims that her late husband, Sri T. Valli Rao, was an employee in the 2^^ respondent's office, and was earlier married to the unofficial respondent No.6; however, he was not living with the 6^'^ respondent. Thus, he married the petitioner in 2010. Sri Valli Rao, the petitioner's husband, died on 05.10.2021, while in service.

¶64

The unofficial respondent No.6, has applied for pension and death benefits. In pursuance thereof, when the official respondents were proposing to release death benefits in favour of the unofficial respondent No.6 the petitioner has approached this Court by way of^{theinstantWritPetition.}

¶65

The unofficial respondent filed a counter affidavit^and relied on the entries in the Service Register. It is stated that the list of family members of late Sri T.Valli Rao, as mentioned in Service Register,^containsthe name of the unofficial respondent's name and the name of^{thedeceased'smother.}

¶66

It is argued by the learned counsel Sri Raghuveer,^thatasthe name of the writ petitioner and the name of the mother^{ofthedeceased} is also Lakshmi, the petitioner is taking undue advantage of the same and is claiming the death benefits of the deceased. It is^{furthercontendedthatthe} writ petitioner is not the legally wedded wife of late^{SriT.ValliRao,andthe} unofficial respondent and the deceased were living together and were never separated. Having regard to the same, the learned counsel^{fortheunofficial} respondent would submit that the petitioner has no legal right to claim pensionary and death benefits of the deceased T Valli^Rao.

¶67

It is further contended that in recognition of the unofficial

¶68

respondent’s status as the wife of the deceased person, the respondents have also released funeral expenses in favour of the unofficial respondent.

¶69

It is brought to the notice of the Court the proceedings of the 4^*^ respondent dated 14.08.2024, directing the respondent No.6 herein to submit the new pension proposals after finalization of the disputes between the writ petitioner and respondent No.6.

¶70

Having regard to the submissions made this Court is not inclined to adjudicate upon the issue as to who is the legally wedded wife of the deceased person. However, considering the entries made in the Service Register of the deceased, since the name of the unofficial respondent is shown as one of the family members of the deceased. The respondents are therefore at liberty to release the pensionary/death benefits in favour of the person(s) whose names are entered in the Service Register as family member(s). The petitioner is at liberty to avail alternate remedies available to her under the law.

¶71